Mayflower Share Discussion Threads

[cmillar] 04/10/2004 17:13

Soysoy

Ref:
OUR LAWYERS HAVE IDEA THAT THEY MAYBE SOMETHING WRONG, THEY WOULD NOT PUTTING TIME AND EFORT OTHERWISE

Does this mean they are acting on a No win No fee basis??

[soysoy] 02/10/2004 09:03

Loan Market Week



Investment Group Pitched Eleventh Hour Bid For Mayflower
----M.J.S.




Mizuho International and an unnamed private equity investor reportedly made an offer to buy Mayflower Corp. for a package worth £80-95 million ahead of the company's filing for administration. As first reported on LMW's Web site, the investment group was willing to buy the company's £221 million in bank debt and pari passu bonds for about £50-60 million and provide the company an additional £30-35 million needed to properly restructure, explained one source familiar with the negotiations. But after 14 hours of negotiations, no agreement could be reached.

The bid would give bank debt holders about 22% recovery on a present value, compared to a report from Deloitte & Touche that estimated bank debt holders receive about 22.5% recovery in the future, said the source. "It became clear that it was too late to reverse course. The company's lenders could not reach an agreement to keep it out of administration," the source added. The investment group's bid was dependant on keeping Mayflower out of administration. The administrators will now begin selling off the company piecemeal, he added.

The investment group met with Alan Jamieson, Mayflower's chief restructuring officer and recently appointed ceo; and Mayflower's bank group, including lead lenders Credit Suisse First Boston and The Royal Bank of Scotland, as well as HSBC Bank, which leads a receivables facility for the company.

Mizuho International officials declined comment. Calls to CSFB, RBS, and HSBC were referred to spokespeople who either declined comment or did not return calls. Calls to Nick Dargan and Nick Edwards, Mayflower's administrators from Deloitte, were referred to a spokeswoman, who declined to comment. Jamieson could no longer be reached at Mayflower.

[soysoy] 28/9/2004 18:36

SCIBBLER101
I WILL BEABLE TO BUTTER YOUR PARSNIPS VERY SOON,
BUT COULD YOU AND ANYONE ELSE BUTTER MINE AND DO SOMETHING USEFULL AND WRITE LETTER TO FSA AND ANYONE IMPORTANT PERHAPS A LETTER TO FT OR YOUR MP,
SAYING HOW YOU WANT THIS COMPANY TO BE LOOKED AT.

OUR LAWYERS HAVE IDEA THAT THEY MAYBE SOMETHING WRONG, THEY WOULD NOT PUTTING TIME AND EFORT OTHERWISE
TRY CLICKING ON LINK BELOW




HERS SOME OF THE CONTENTS OF BBC RADIO 4 WITH OUR SOLICTORS
This is the transcript of the interview with David Greene on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme, held on Monday 19 April 2004 at 06:22. The interview can be dowloaded as two MP3 files (or as one Zip file containing both) on the News page.


Presenter:
Shareholders in the bus manufacturer Mayflower have appointed the law firm Edwin Coe to examine a rights issue of new shares by the company in 2002, which raised £64 million. Mayflower went into administration last month after a £17 million 'black hole' was found in its accounts. David Greene is a partner at Edwin Coe and is here, Good Morning.

David Greene:
Good Morning Graham

Presenter:
What is it about this rights issue that you're going to be looking at?

David Greene:
Well in relation to the rights issue a couple of years ago, the question is what information was available to shareholders in taking up the rights and whether that information was accurate. At the moment there are anecdotal tales, I won't say more than that at the moment, about the hole in the accounts, that appear to go back to that period and clearly that's of concern to shareholders.

Presenter:
What evidence is there then, that this black hole was long standing thing, if you like?

David Greene:
Well, shareholders are in a difficult position, because they rely on what really the press obtain. It looks as though the company itself said there was a hole in the accounts, just before it went into administration and the question is how far that goes back. Now it is suggested it does go back more than 2 years and indeed it has been suggested it goes back 4 years. So if it does then it would look as though the information in that rights issue may have been inaccurate.

Presenter:
Was there anything at all in the rights issue prospectus, to indicate that the amount of money might have been missing?

David Greene:
No absolutely nothing. Nothing at all. The rights issue prospectus relied on the 2001 accounts at the time, that were not finalised at the time, but no indication of a hole at that point.

Presenter:
So you're conducting an investigation at the moment. Will you be seeking to interview directors and former directors?

David Greene:
Yes, any investigation tries to get as much information as possible and clearly one of the points is what did the directors know at the time? Whether they knew anything? We'll try and obtain that information. Whether the directors will be forthcoming, we'll wait and see.

Presenter:
John Major sat on the audit committee, as a non-executive director of Mayflower. Will you be seeking to interview him?

David Greene:
Yes certainly we'll seek information from him and see what he knew about it. But indications at the moment are that, as we say, there was a hole that wasn't disclosed and that there have been allegations about what was told, what was said and what wasn't said at the time and we'll have to investigate that to come to some conclusions.

Presenter:
What course of action is open to you and to shareholders, if you conclude that actually this hole was known about?

David Greene:
Well if the hole was known about, then in relation to the rights issue, the shareholders who took up the rights are entitled to bring action against those who are responsible for the prospectus. Which includes the directors and others, who put their name to the prospectus. I think as well, the concern that the shareholders will have is, what information was available to the market more recently and whether there should be an investigation by the FSA in relation to that information?

Presenter:
So when will you be able to decide whether legal action is appropriate or not?

David Greene:
Well I would guess that we'll be deciding in about three months, whether action is appropriate. It depends what information we can obtain. The great difficulty for shareholders in these circumstances is that they are very much on the outside and they rely on others to obtain that information.

Presenter:
David Greene from Edwin Coe, thanks very much for that.

David Greene:
It's a pleasure

[scribbler101] 24/9/2004 02:35

soysoy - we all hope the fine words will eventually butter our parsnips.

AFAIK, you have not yet asked for subscriptions. Who is paying for the lawyers?

[soysoy] 23/9/2004 19:23

Action group accomplish fxxk all is what someone wrote early on
Lets see what we have achieved

1The Mayflower investigation is the first inquiry by the AIDB, set up in May as part of a new independent regulator for the accounting profession to deal with allegations of misconduct against accountants.
The group, which said the investigation will likely take "several months", can seek to impose unlimited fines on firms or individuals, or have them expelled from professions' representative bodies
2Many major press articles TV and radio and Evan from down under and the USA
3The share is still under suspension, which I still feel it's not to late for fall public enquiry with serious fraud squad getting involved.
4I KNOW I KEEP SAY THIS BUT A "MAJOR NEWS SCANDELL WHICH I HAVE BE INFORMED FROM GOOD SOURCE
5ALSO SOME LARGE INSITUION OF SHOWEN AN INTEREST
MY GUT FEELING IS THAT THE CONSERVATIVE CONFERIENCE COULD BE COME VERY INTERESTING AND WORD SLEESE MIGHT POP UP
Also we have top lawyers working on the case from london

[soysoy] 19/9/2004 22:47

Could we do the same




British Energy rebels face £2bn lawsuit from bondholders
By Andrew Murray-Watson (Filed: 19/09/2004)


Private shareholders in British Energy could be drawn into a £2bn lawsuit if they back plans by Polygon, the maverick hedge fund manager, to block a restructuring of the nuclear power company.



Late last week bondholders in British Energy started legal action against rebel shareholders, led by Polygon, who have been trying to persuade the company's board to dismantle a legally binding £5bn rescue deal.

The legal action would seek to claim damages against every investor in BE with sums based on the amount of shares held.

An executive close to the bondholders said: "Obviously we would go after Polygon and the other big guns first, but every shareholder who sides with them could be liable to pay damages."

Even small investors with a relatively small stake could be faced with claims for damages totalling tens of thousands of pounds. BE has 230,000 small retail shareholders and Polygon has claimed that its campaign enjoys the support of the majority of investors.

On Friday bondholders submitted a writ against Polygon in the High Court in London, in order for the hedge fund to be made "accountable for any loss stakeholders may suffer as a result of its actions".

The rebel shareholders are understood to be determined to continue their attempts to halt the restructuring, which would see at least 92.5 per cent of BE's equity handed over to its bondholders.

Polygon has proposed an alternative scheme that would allow shareholders to keep 30 per cent of the company.

It is understood that later this week BE will agree to Polygon's request for an extraordinary general meeting. Polygon wants to propose special resolutions that will stop BE completing its restructuring without shareholder approval.

Meanwhile, Deutsche Bank, one of BE's largest creditors, claimed in a letter sent to Polygon on Friday that damages to bondholders if the restructuring was blocked would be at least £1.7bn.

The legal moves are threatening to derail Polygon's campaign. Malcolm Stacey, the founder of the Sharecrazy.com website, who is co-ordinating small shareholder opposition, said he could no longer advise investors to vote with Polygon at an EGM.

[soysoy] 18/9/2004 09:44

JOHN MAJOR IS THE GUINNESS BOOK OF RECORDS FOR THE ONLY ONE TO RUN AWAY FROM CIRCUS TO BECOME AN ACCOUNTANT
from my little tonny above ask him a question

[soysoy] 18/9/2004 09:31

ASK ANY QUESTION

[soysoy] 17/9/2004 15:27

27 days to go

[soysoy] 16/9/2004 22:14

IF THE PEOPLE THAT PURCHASED THE SHIP ARE DOING VERY WELL
They would be because they got at 1/4 of the price of what it was worth and the rest of the business as well
IT MAKES YOU WOUNDER IF THE WHOLE THING WAS A SET UP, WHICH IS WHAT I THOUGHT FROM THE BEGINING
GIVE ME 28 DAYS AND I MAY BE ABLE TO PROVE IT.

[anomalous] 16/9/2004 21:32

You will know the truth soon. I know we keep saying this, but we are waiting for someone to complete their work. It should not be too long.

[ricra] 16/9/2004 21:27

Although I thought this was all going to be great, and a big help to shareholders, I must admit I am beginning to wonder what is going on.
Rumour has it that the people that purchased the ship are doing very well and they have o rdered another one, and orders are rolling in. Whether this is true or not I don't know, but you have to wonder what on earth went on at Mayflower. It wasn't doing that badly, so why did the bank really pull the plug, and who was in charge at the bank and made the decision, and has he had any further interest in Mayflower, or any parts that have been sold. The whole thing stinks to me, but I am beginning to wonder if we will ever know the truth. I, for one am thinking of going after the accountans as they do not seem to have issued the correct figures on which shareholders can decide to buy or not.

[scribbler101] 16/9/2004 19:52

Send not to ask for whom the bell is told.

It tolls for thee. It tolls for thee.


The thing is, soysoy, when the boy keeps crying "wolf" when there is no wolf, no-one reacts when there is one, and the sheep get eaten.

[soysoy] 16/9/2004 18:50

SCRIBBLER 101
I KNOW I SAID THIS BEFORE BUT
I AM ONLY SAYING WHAT I HAVE BEEN TOLD

[soysoy] 16/9/2004 16:53

"Majour" news story breaking within 28days

[jakass] 07/9/2004 19:31

Another example of the naive and amateurish behaviour of the FSA.


UK FSA plays down importance of Legal & General appeal
•Website •Fundamentals •Share Price




LONDON (AFX) - The head of the Financial Services Authority John Tiner has
played down the importance of a pending court battle with insurance giant Legal
& General Group PLC by saying that it would not reflect badly on the FSA if the
financial watchdog lost, The Times reported today.

John Tiner made the comments in a speech to City lawyers, astonishing many
in the square mile, who see the forthcoming case at the Financial Services &
Markets Tribunal as the greatest challenge yet to the FSA's authority, the
newspaper said.

"I think it will be a mistake to give (the case) a symbolic importance that
I do not believe it has," Tiner was quoted as saying.

"It is not a case of one firm standing up to the regulator on behalf of
other firms."

Legal & General is attempting to appeal against a 1.1 mln stg fine meted out
to it by the FSA over endowment mortgage mis-selling, on the grounds that the
original process and judgment was unfair.

The case will start in seven days.

[soysoy] 07/9/2004 19:11

We would like employees who can corroborate certain facts to come forward and anonymously verify the truth of information.

We may not be able to preserve the company in its present form, but we may be able to see that those responsible for the employees losing their jobs and pensions get their just deserts at the hands of the company regulators.

With the help of the unions the Action Group may be able to claim compensation for the victims from the directors and their advisors. To contact us in confidence,

[soysoy] 06/9/2004 18:46

biscuit have you contacted me
YOU GOT TO REGISTER ON MY WEBSITE
new action group

[biscuit275] 06/9/2004 15:42

you can add me to the list - I have/had shares and paid up for the rights issue.

[soysoy] 05/9/2004 20:08

knowing
yes but it`s going to take longer than i hoped

[anomalous] 04/9/2004 20:43

There is a possibility that the shareholders who purchased during the rights issue, may be able to sue the directors and the banks that backed the issue, as it was based on false information.

They may not have known that the information was false at the time, but this does not excuse them. The directors had a duty to verify the veracity of the information. As they did not do so, they were negligent. That is their problem, as they are now therefore liable, jointly and severly. As one of these was Credit Suisse First Boston, a bank with considerable assets, they may have to stump up quite a lot of damages. I know of at least 2 large City firms that are interested in recovering some of their lost funds.

For the shareholders that purchased during the last few months, you will find out what happened very soon.

We can't say more as we've been asked (politely) to hold our fire until someone is ready. The Action Group will come out, 'All Guns Blazing' when the truth is finally made public.

Until then, please be patient. The wait will be worth it. You have my word on it.

[the knowing] 03/9/2004 20:44

SOY have been following out of interest. Do you expect shareholders to recoup any losses ?